|
Post by sgrant on Nov 21, 2006 21:17:26 GMT -8
I occasionally spend time on the shorelines of the southern Gulf Islands.
An aspect of these places is the regular arrival of the ferry wakes. The effects of these waves range from the amusing to the not-so-amusing.
The amusing ones include campers getting soaked while rinsing dishes, extinguished campfires, and making sure your children don't get washed away.
The serious ones involve the energy impacting on the shorelines. The greater the energy of arriving waves, the steeper, higher and farther back the beaches are. Animals such as seals who haul themselves just out of the water to dry off and rest get soaked regularly. Intertidal life is subjected to pounding waves far more frequently than if there were no ferries.
Has BC Ferries ever done a study to determine the overall ecological consequences of the ferry wakes?
What are peoples' thoughts on this?
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on Nov 21, 2006 21:30:58 GMT -8
Well, the PacifiCats brought this wake issue to the forefront during their tenure.....and the Ferry corp actually slowed down those ships as a result.
But that distracts from your point, which is that conventional ships create a wake that does have real consequences to the environment.
No, I haven't heard that observation before. It does make sense to me, that the ferries do have an impact on the environment. I suspect that this issue extends well beyond that of our ferries, and would encompass much of mankind's transportation effects on Earth.
Interesting idea, thanks for bringing it up. I'll think about it over the next few days.
|
|
|
Post by Balfour on Nov 21, 2006 22:22:27 GMT -8
I don't think it's an issue in active pass. I was on one of those beaches back in July on the forum's Galiano Island trip and the ferries made some pretty big waves, but nothing destructive. If anything I had fun jumping around in those waves ;D
|
|
Neil
Voyager
Posts: 7,309
|
Post by Neil on Nov 21, 2006 22:23:50 GMT -8
When I'm on one of the smaller. open deck ferries, and it's in the slip, I always enjoy looking down over the side at the dock structure, and noticing how it's teeming with life: absolutely covered with barnacles, mussels, starfish, crabs... fish nibbling away- the man made structure that shelters the ferry also shelters thousands of small lives. Anemones and filter feeders thrive on the wake that churns up countless small meals.
Our coast is largely rock. The relatively few beaches and other erodable shorefronts are probably not impacted much by ferry wakes when compared to the constant weather and tides. Your point is an interesting one, but it raises the pertinent question- what's the alternative? We do leave a pretty heavy footprint on this planet, but, since we do have to get around, I'd guess that ferry wakes might be considered an 'acceptable risk'.
|
|
|
Post by Political Incorrectness on Nov 21, 2006 22:24:09 GMT -8
Oh yes, when it was 30 degrees out? We should have done a ferry geeks gone wild. Chris, bring your boat next time just so that we can go around the Gulf Islands.
|
|
Doug
Voyager
Lurking within...the car deck.
Posts: 2,213
|
Post by Doug on Nov 21, 2006 22:32:53 GMT -8
We leave a footprint on this planet everytime we walk in the grass, or even take a breath.
|
|
|
Post by Barnacle on Nov 22, 2006 15:51:13 GMT -8
...On the other hand the soft shore line - which is mostly sand / mud and is on a gradual slope from high tide marker to low tide marker - is at more of a risk to the wash - wave action - as it wears away at the material - and moves it along the shore line. It is called "Long Shore Drift". (The Sidney terminal suffers from this - hence they have to dredge the "channel" every 3 to 5 years)... Sidney is a muddy-bottomed terminal, yes, but I've been on the run for almost nine years and I've never been aware of any dredging operations. I thought the ferry's wash and backwash (especially given how much mud we kick up upon landing) kept the "WSF Channel" dredged.
|
|
|
Post by Mike C on Nov 22, 2006 16:02:33 GMT -8
Well, as the grandson of an owner of waterfront property in Little River, we are quite close to the Queen of Burnaby's path to Powell River. As compared to Cruise Ships which are about 6 miles further then the Burnaby will ever be, those make the biggest waves by far.
There has been no destruction, that we know of, to our property or of the sealife on the shore and in the water.
While I'm there, I like to make bike trips every couple of days to the ferry dock and check it out, whether the ferry is in or not. I sit on the sandy beach (that some forum members would be farmiliar with) and watch the ferry leave; there is almost no change, after the ferry leaves, as compared to as it was when the ferry was pointlessly idiling there a few minutes before.
Mind you, that's a B-class, and I cannot say much.
|
|
|
Post by sgrant on Nov 22, 2006 22:44:16 GMT -8
Thanks for the varied and thoughtful responses.
|
|
|
Post by Barnacle on Nov 24, 2006 17:08:32 GMT -8
So the breakwater isn't there to protect the boat launch?
Hmm. So when did they do the dredging between 1960 and 2003, when there were no shutdowns in winter?
|
|
|
Post by Political Incorrectness on Nov 24, 2006 17:35:18 GMT -8
cascade, where did you get this information from and can you provide URLs to it? I am a bit skeptical on your claims and I want to see what your sources are.
|
|